Complexicated Voting Strategery

I found this article interesting:

What's A Perverse Voter To Do?
Vote McCain to advance top liberal initiatives and the Democratic Party; vote Obama for the health of the GOP and the vindication of Bush.
by Jonathan Rauch — Saturday, Oct. 25, 2008
(http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/st_20081022_3411.php)

I gather Mr. Rauch is a liberal. Maybe, then, he's betting his commentary could "trick" more people into voting for Sen. Obama than it pushes toward Sen. McCain. Nevertheless, his piece poses some fascinating hypothetical projections based upon some interesting reminders from history. At the very least, it's entertaining.

(Incidentally, where I really have to disagree with Mr. Rauch is his conclusion that we have two very good candidates from which to choose. Both have "potential for greatness"? I suppose it's possible; but not likely. "[T]the two most singular political talents of their generations"? [So Pres. Clinton and Rep. Gingrich aren't comparable because their from an in-between generation? We're only considering really old and really young politicians?] Maybe. But has "political talent" alone ever made a great president? Sure FDR, Kennedy and Reagan arguably had political talent; but is that what made many consider them "great"? I think this election process has gradually boiled down to the least substantial candidates. It's sad when some of us begin to pine (all too late) for Gov. Romney, Gov. Richardson, Sen. Dodd, Rep. Hunter, and Sen. Biden (at least he's on a ticket); I guess those people just weren't interesting enough. All they had was a lot of relevant public policy experience and knowledge.)